RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS



IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00290

            INDEX CODE:  100.00


            COUNSEL:  NONE


            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed so  that
he can reenlist and join his local Air Force  Reserve/Air  National  Guard
(ANG).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His separation from the Air Force was due  to  his  financial  status  and
irresponsibility which caused an enormous amount of stress  upon  himself.
At the time of enlistment and separation, he  was  in  debt  approximately
$4,500 along with college loans that totaled $7,000.  Since  he  separated
from the Air Force in 1999, he has greatly changed  his  financial  status
which was due to a full time job as a supervisor at  a  telecommunications
company which paid more  money  than  the  Air  Force.   Now  that  he  is
financially stable and not under  the  pressure  that  he  was  previously
under, he would like the chance to serve for the Air Force  Reserves  part
time while maintaining his full time job and his good financial status.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 28 Apr 99, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF)  for
a period of four years in the grade of airman.

On 11 Aug 99, applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)  for  missing
four hours of training.  He acknowledged receipt of the LOR on  12 Aug  99
and submitted a response.

On 19 Aug 99, applicant received an LOR for not  purchasing  a  belt.   He
acknowledged receipt of the LOR on 19 Aug 99 and indicated that  he  would
submit a response; however, as of 24 Aug 99, he did not submit statements.

On 27 Aug 99, applicant received an LOR for missing  a  briefing  and  for
being late to a briefing.  He acknowledged receipt of the LOR on 30 Aug 99
and indicated that he would submit a response; however, as of 1 Sep 99, he
did not submit statements.

On 30 Aug 99, applicant received an  LOR  for  failure  to  appear  for  a
mandatory formation and  for  being  disrespectful  to  a  noncommissioned
officer (NCO).  He acknowledged receipt  of  the  LOR  on  30 Aug  99  and
indicated  that  he  would  not  submit  documents   or   statements   for
consideration.

On 14 Sep 99, applicant was notified of his commander’s intent  to  impose
nonjudicial punishment upon him for failure to  obey  a  lawful  order  to
return  to  training.   On  14 Sep  99,  after  consulting  with  counsel,
applicant waived his right to a trial by court-martial, did not request  a
personal appearance and did not submit a written presentation.  On  14 Sep
99, he was found  guilty  by  his  commander  who  imposed  the  following
punishment:  Reduction from the grade of airman to  the  grade  of  airman
basic, with a new date of rank (DOR) of 14 Sep 99 and forfeiture of  $207.
Applicant did not appeal the punishment.  The Article 15 was not filed  in
his Unfavorable Information File (UIF).

On 16 Sep 99, applicant was notified that his commander  was  recommending
that he be discharged from the Air Force for Entry Level  Performance  and
Conduct.  The reasons for the commander’s actions were  as  stated  above.
Applicant’s case file was reviewed and found to be legally  sufficient  to
support separation.  The Assistant Staff Judge  Advocate  recommended  the
applicant be separated from the service with an Entry Level separation.

On 23 Sep 99, the applicant was separated from the  Air  Force  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Entry Level Performance  and  Conduct)  in  the
grade of airman with an uncharacterized character of service, a separation
code of JGA (Entry Level), and an RE code of 2C  (Involuntarily  separated
with  an  honorable  discharge;  or   entry   level   separation   without
characterization of service).  He was credited with 4 months and  26  days
of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Military Personnel Management Specialist,  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed  this
application and indicated that, based upon the documentation in the  file,
they  believe  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.   Additionally,  the
discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  The
applicant did not submit any  new  evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing nor  did  he  provide
facts warranting a change in his narrative  reason  for  separation  or  a
change in his separation code.  Accordingly, DPPRS recommends his  records
remain the same and his request be denied.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Special Programs & AFBCMR Manager,  AFPC/DPPAES,  also  reviewed  this
application and indicated that the RE code 2C is correct.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on  23 Mar
01 for review and response.   As  of  this  date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice.   We  reviewed  the  applicant’s
entire record and the circumstances surrounding his  separation  from  the
Air Force in 1999.  After careful consideration of the available evidence,
we found no substantiation that the applicant’s separation was improper or
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect  at  the
time, or that the actions taken against him were based  on  factors  other
than his own misconduct, i.e., LORs, Article 15.   In  addition,  we  note
that applicant's assigned RE code of  2C  accurately  reflects  his  entry
level separation.  If, as  he  asserts,  he  has  overcome  his  financial
difficulty, then we applaud him.  However, the reason for  separation  and
RE code are correct based on the facts that existed at  the  time  of  his
separation.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find
no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.

_________________________________________________________________






THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not  demonstrate
the  existence  of  probable  material  error  or  injustice;   that   the
application was  denied  without  a  personal  appearance;  and  that  the
application will  only  be  reconsidered  upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on  8 May  2001,  under  the  provisions  of  Air  Force
Instruction 36-2603:

                  Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Panel Chair
                  Mr. John L. Robuck, Member
                  Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Nov 00, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 14 Feb 01.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, undated.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Mar 01.




                                   TEDDY L. HOUSTON
                                   Panel Chair